Bachhu Yadav Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Jharkhand High Court)
Summary: The Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi considered Bachhu Yadav’s regular bail application arising from an Enforcement Directorate investigation into alleged money laundering connected with illegal stone mining in Sahibganj. The petitioner had been in custody since 5 August 2022. The prosecution case referred to the transportation of 1,844 trucks or vehicles carrying stone chips between 1 and 26 June 2022, including 412 vehicles allegedly lacking mining challans. The Enforcement Directorate relied on a ₹30 lakh cash deposit made on 24 January 2022 and alleged that the petitioner was associated with Pankaj Mishra and participated in illegal transportation and collection of levies. It referred to broader allegations of mining-related proceeds of crime, related FIRs and criminal antecedents. These matters were presented as prosecution allegations, not findings of guilt after trial.
The petitioner argued that the January 2022 deposit preceded the specific period of June 2022 relied upon by the prosecution and therefore could not logically represent proceeds generated during that later period. He disputed his alleged connection with Pankaj Mishra and relied on the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA in relation to the ₹1 crore threshold. The Enforcement Directorate opposed bail on the grounds of the seriousness of the alleged economic offences, the broader criminal activity and the petitioner’s antecedents. It relied on Vijay Madan Lal Choudhary v. Union of India and Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI. The High Court considered the gravity of the allegations, materials on record and criminal antecedents and declined regular bail.
The order was subsequently considered by the Supreme Court in SLP (Criminal) No. 7561 of 2023, which granted conditional bail on 6 September 2023. That subsequent decision is separate from the High Court order reproduced below.
Read Supreme Court Judgment in this case: Prolonged Incarceration and Pending Trial: SC Grants Bail in PMLA Case of Illegal Stone Mining
Cases Discussed
- Sayyed Nasar Vs Union of India & Ors. — NGT Principal Bench, order dated 23 September 2020 (as referred to in the High Court order)
- Vijay Madan Lal Choudhary Vs Union of India — 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929.
- Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs CBI — (2013) 7 SCC 439.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Petitioner above-named who is in custody since 05.08.2022 has moved this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with ECIR Case No.04/2022 (in ECIR /RNZO/ 03/2022 dated 08.03.2022) registered under Section 4 of the PMLA, 2022. Heard the parties.
PROSECUTION CASE:
1. ECIR No.03 of 2022 [EIR/RNZO/03/2022] was recorded on 08.03.2022 based on FIR No.85 of 2020 dated 22.06.2020 lodged by Barharwa Police Station, Sahibganj District, Jharkhand under Sections 147, 149, 341, 342, 323, 379, 504, 506 read with 120-B of IPC against 11 named and other unnamed persons. Petitioner did not figure in the list of the named accused persons in the FIR.
2. During the course of investigation, four FIRs were also identified to be lodged against the accused persons and were merged in the instant ECIR. Petitioner is one of the accused in three of these cases. The offences involved are under Sections 307,384 and 120 B of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, which were scheduled offence under PMLA.
3. Prosecution complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) paints a grim picture of large scale illegal mining activities in the famed Rajmahal hills in the District of Sahebganj generating crime proceeds running into crores. The three accused in the prosecution complaint are (i)Pankaj Mishra (A-1) (ii) Bachhu Yadav( A2-petitioner) and (iii) Prem Prakash (A-3). The trio carried the illegal mining activities with support of their cohorts including those in political and administrative establishment.
4. The modus operandi was, control over inland and road transport ways 2023:JHHC:10235 transporting the minerals from mines. Barharwa Toll assumed a pivotal position to control this toll which held the key to gain control over the 6 tolls which came under this Nagar Panchayat. These six tolls under Barharwa Nagar Panchayat Toll fell in route connecting the mining sites and the main roads from where the mined items were transported to destined places. A huge volume of mining was being carried out illegally in Sahibganj District and adjoining areas and control over the transportation line was key to the control of the illegal mining activities.
5. Hon’ble NGT, Principal Bench, New Delhi had also taken note of the issue of illegal mining in Sahibganj District in case of Sayyed Nasar Vs Union of India & Ors. Vide Order dated 23.9.20 in the said matter, a committee was constituted to suggest remedy in the problem of illegal mining. The Hon’ble Bench observed as under:- “ The mining companies or other entities are indulging in indiscriminate mining and operating stone crushers without due regard to the environmental norms. In this process, the hills are blown up. To remedy the problem, the tribunal passed several orders in the last three years including prohibiting illegal mining and non-compliant stone crushing activities vide order dated 6.07.2017 followed by order dated 17.04.2018”.
6. The committee submitted its report in which it specifically mentioned that 125 FIRs have been lodged against various persons for the offence of illegal mining, storage and transportation involving illegal mining and related activities
7. The proceeds of crime out of the illegal mining was generated in cash and was being transferred to the petitioner and others who were involved in illegal mining and its transportation activities.
8. The petitioner knowingly assisted and was actually involved in the process and activities connected with the proceeds of crime including its acquisition, possession, use and concealment and projecting the proceeds of crime as untainted property. He was having criminal antecedents and was a party in the activities connected with extortion and collection of levies from the vehicles carrying stone chips illegally. He assisted accused no.1, in his illegal activities relating to stone mining and extortion. He was involved in operations of inland vessels, engaged in illegal transportation of trucks laden with stone chips from Sai happens to Bihar. He looked after collection of levies from trucks transported on inland vessels carrying illegally mined stone chips.
9. He was involved in the transportation of 1844 trucks/vehicles carrying stone 2023:JHHC:10235 chips between 01.6.2022 to 26.06.22 through inland vessels from Sahibganj to Bihar. Out of these 1844 trucks, 412 trucks carried stones without obtaining desired mining challans. The scrutiny of his bank account showed huge cash deposit amounting to ₹ 30 lakh on 24.1.2022, which was proceeds of crime acquired by him out of his illegal activities and the accused could not provide explanation to such huge cash deposit. The accused has several criminal and he knowingly assisted accused no.1, who managed his criminal cases. Petitioner’s Case:-
10.It is submitted by learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the prosecution complaint refers to specific period from 1st June, 2022 to 26th June, 2022, in which he was involved in transportation of 1844 trucks/ vehicles carrying stone chips from Sahebganj to Bihar and as per allegation, 412 trucks carried stone-chips without obtaining desired mining challan(s). However, the amount that has been shown to be deposited in his account of Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank of Rs.30 Lakhs was on 24.01.2022 which is before the said period of 01.06.2022 to 26.06.2022. It is logically not tenable that crime proceeds will be generated before the period under reference.
11. With regard to his association with co-accused, Pankaj Mishra, the statement given before E.D. has been referred to wherein, he has brought on record the fact which do suggest that he had no connection with accused no.1, rather he has given telling account against the complicity of Pankaj Mishra for the offence of illegal transportation and mining activities in the District of Sahebganj. It is submitted that co-accused, Pankaj Mishra in his statement has also stated that he has no concern with this petitioner and had no business relationship with him. Having criminal antecedent is not sufficient the petitioner to launch prosecution for offence of PMLA. However, in any case, the crime proceeds that has been shown against this petitioner comes to Rs.30 Lakhs and under Section 45 of the said Act and its proviso, any accused involved in money laundering for a sum upto Rs.1 Crore may be released on bail. Argument on behalf of ED:-
12.Learned ASGI for the ED has vehemently opposed the prayer. It is submitted that prayer for regular bail of similar situated co-accused persons has already been rejected by this Hon’ble Court and at this stage.
13.It is submitted that allegation of being involved against this petitioner is not limited to the said period of 01.06.2022 to 26.06.2022, but relate to being Searches were conducted in the premises of Pankaj Mishra and his associates and 2023:JHHC:10235 cash worth ₹ 5 crore was seized. Further, bank balances of Pankaj Mishra and his associates were frozen having balances worth ₹ 13 crores approximately.
14. Pankaj Mishra had organised the local criminals namely Rajesh Yadav @ Dahu Yadav, this petitioner Bachhu Yadav and others, and was using them for exerting threats to run business of extortion and illegal mining and transportation. The petitioner has criminal antecedents, detailed in para 3.8 and 3.9, being involved in 12 criminal cases of serious nature.
15.It is also argued that once the foundational fact of being involved in the schedule offence and also having been found in possession with proceeds of crime has been established, the burden of proof is shifted to the petitioner under section 24 of the PMLA, in view of the ratio decided in Vijay Madan Lal Choudhary Vs UOI 2022 SCC On Line 929. The offence money-laundering being in the nature of economic offence is to be considered under different footing in bail matters in view of the long line of judicial precedents. It has been held in Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI, (2013) 7 SCC 439 : 34. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep- rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.
16.The matter involves large-scale illegal mining activities being conducted in the District of Sahibganj, by well entrenched crime cartels generating crime proceeds running into crores causing huge loss of public money by loss of mineral resources, the royalty and other taxes on it. The petitioner appears to be a close associate of Accused no.1 and huge sum has been seized form his Bank account. Considering the gravity of offence, the materials on record as well as criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail and accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.
